This one seems to have a good sense of the tone it's going for, even if it is riding the Batman Begins wave. Raimi's movies alternated between effective comedy and atrocious drama. If this script avoids emulating the awful dialogue of the Raimi flicks, I'll be a happy man. I'm optimistic.

Also, Andrew Garfield is exactly the right body-type for this. Oh, and he can actually act.

Yeah, I definitely dig the tone, and it's hitting all of the right notes. Coming from someone who hates the Raimi versions, the fact that I'm even morbidly curious speaks volumes.

This one seems to have a good sense of the tone it's going for, even if it is riding the Batman Begins wave. Raimi's movies alternated between effective comedy and atrocious drama. If this script avoids emulating the awful dialogue of the Raimi flicks, I'll be a happy man. I'm optimistic.

Also, Andrew Garfield is exactly the right body-type for this. Oh, and he can actually act.

Yeah, I definitely dig the tone, and it's hitting all of the right notes. Coming from someone who hates the Raimi versions, the fact that I'm even morbidly curious speaks volumes.

Meh. It looks like an angsty combination of Batman Begins and Raimi's movie with atrocious and gimmicky POV shots. Color me less interested than I was before I saw the trailer...which wasn't all that much considering I'm not fan of the Raimi trilogy either.

Completely late to the party, but finally got around to seeing X-Men First Class. Liked it quite a bit, but the character makeup is about eight steps back from the previous incarnation. Beast looked like a blue werewolf out of a film that MST3K might have panned.

I'm just a horse, standing in front of a boy, asking him to love me. - Andrew Forbes

Andrew Forbes wrote:Also, Andrew Garfield is exactly the right body-type for this. Oh, and he can actually act.

I strongly disagree with you on that -- Garfield sells the more agile and wiry aspect of SM, but he still looks too skinny and not solid enough. He can act circles around Maguire, but wrong body type. And it's strange to see the HQ trailer -- the Marvel logo is nowhere to be found and to top it off, I'm getting a strong Twilight vibe from this.

On the other hand, the DVD and Blu-ray editions of X-Men: First Class are up for pre-order. Fox Connect's website even has a free T-shirt available to people who preorder either edition (from 7/21-7/27), plus free ground shipping. Nice to see that and Thor coming out a few days apart from each other.

"Aliens conquering Earth would be fine with me, as long as they make me their queen."- Gillian Anderson

Captain America II, a made for TV "film" made in the 70s, is on SighFie at the moment. It's bad when you remember that 10 year-old you thought it was bad, but holy sweet mother of Christ, this thing is baaaaaaaaaad.

Must have been a Cap marathon, 'cause next they showed the 1990 Captain America flick that ended up going straight to video. While it does not achieve the surreal MST3K-levels of badness that the Reb Brown movies did, it's ridiculously earnest environmental message helped made me appreciate the relative subtlety of Superman IV: The Quest for Peace.

The Doctor Strange movie is picking up steam. So the question I have is this, if Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and Captain America all assemble the pieces for an Avengers movie, would it not be cool if this Doctor Strange film were the first step towards an eventual Defenders movie?

"The most dementing of all modern sins: the inability to distinquish excellence from success."-David Hare

HGervais wrote:The Doctor Strange movie is picking up steam. So the question I have is this, if Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and Captain America all assemble the pieces for an Avengers movie, would it not be cool if this Doctor Strange film were the first step towards an eventual Defenders movie?

I've heard rumors that Patrick Dempsey is lobbying for the title role of Doctor Strange. I know people are going to crack "Dr. Dreamy is now Dr. Strange" jokes, but if Dempsey ever is up for the role I think he could a decent job. It'd be out-of-the-box casting, but I'd give him a chance.

"Aliens conquering Earth would be fine with me, as long as they make me their queen."- Gillian Anderson

If we really are at the point where Marvel Studios are prepping movies like Doctor Strange & Ant-Man for production AND they are starting to develop their space based heroes such as Guardians of the Galaxy, well, that is a pretty cool place to be.

"The most dementing of all modern sins: the inability to distinquish excellence from success."-David Hare

HGervais wrote:The Doctor Strange movie is picking up steam. So the question I have is this, if Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and Captain America all assemble the pieces for an Avengers movie, would it not be cool if this Doctor Strange film were the first step towards an eventual Defenders movie?

Cast Amanda Seyfried as Valkyrie and James Franco as Nighthawk and you got a pretty good movie...but who could play Namor?However, after the tiniest glimpse of one of Marvel's first characters in Captain America, when do we get an Invaders movie?

"I ain't a boy, no I'm a man, and I believe in the Promised Land"-Coming to the USA on January 20, 2009!

I think he's a really good pick. Game of Thrones is high-caliber stuff, and the tone is just right for something like Thor 2. Now if they get some more writers to rewrite Payne's script and get Natalie Portman back, I'll be happy.

On another note, Sony has already slated an Amazing Spider-Man sequel for May 2, 2014. They're either supremely confident in this movie (which has another year before it comes out), or they want to reclaim their spot from Marvel Studios.

"Aliens conquering Earth would be fine with me, as long as they make me their queen."- Gillian Anderson

I think he's a really good pick. Game of Thrones is high-caliber stuff, and the tone is just right for something like Thor 2. Now if they get some more writers to rewrite Payne's script and get Natalie Portman back, I'll be happy.

On another note, Sony has already slated an Amazing Spider-Man sequel for May 2, 2014. They're either supremely confident in this movie (which has another year before it comes out), or they want to reclaim their spot from Marvel Studios.

I think people grossly overestimate how well a Spidey reboot will fare, especially since the trilogy is still fresh in the public eye. Now, had Sony did this after the movie's opening weekend...

On the other hand, Sony claiming a prime summer 2014 spot spurred Disney to set release dates for two Marvel movies. One for May 16 and the other June 24th, but they haven't revealed the films' titles.

"Aliens conquering Earth would be fine with me, as long as they make me their queen."- Gillian Anderson

azul017 wrote:On the other hand, Sony claiming a prime summer 2014 spot spurred Disney to set release dates for two Marvel movies. One for May 16 and the other June 24th, but they haven't revealed the films' titles.

HGervais wrote:As for Spiderman. It will open huge and these days that is almost enough.

I think one of us will be wrong next year. People who didn't like SM-3 are skeptical about it, as well as those who liked all three films. Sony has its work cut out for them, trying to market Spider-man as a new, edgier superhero.

Now, if this reboot was SM-4 instead, you'd be right on the money. I think people are grossly overestimating how the reboot will fare with the GA and critics next year, time will tell. But either way, it will have its butt handed to it by The Dark Knight Rises after two weeks.

"Aliens conquering Earth would be fine with me, as long as they make me their queen."- Gillian Anderson

I think what you fail to account for is the recognition factor. Yes the costume is slightly different and yes the actor is new but people know Spiderman and people have flocked to Spiderman pictures in the past. They are going to respond that first weekend, at least, because they know and like the brand.

"The most dementing of all modern sins: the inability to distinquish excellence from success."-David Hare

HGervais wrote:I think what you fail to account for is the recognition factor. Yes the costume is slightly different and yes the actor is new but people know Spiderman and people have flocked to Spiderman pictures in the past. They are going to respond that first weekend, at least, because they know and like the brand.

Ditto that - If this flick doesn't hit at LEAST 400 million international i'll be shocked and apalled.

azul017 wrote:The godawful trailer for Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance. Looks like this will make the first look like Citizen Kane.

This looks about a thousand times better than the first. Not that it looks good, mind you, but this one looks like it was made by someone who at least understands which way to point the camera.

I'd agree with that. My interest in it will increase about 1000% though it turns out being rated R. Ghost Rider should be dark, moody, creepy & violent. Still, that Crank style energy is present in the trailer and I don't think that is a bad thing.

"The most dementing of all modern sins: the inability to distinquish excellence from success."-David Hare

Spider-Man would've been less of a risk if they just skipped the origin story and just made like this was just another entry in the series. Yes, it's a reboot, but any time a new director takes over an existing series, that can be considered just as much of a reboot as any. Just make a new story and have Spidey fight a new villain.

And yes it will definitely make money even if it's bad. The Star Wars prequels and Indiana Jones & The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull were all blockbusters regardless of their quality.

mavrach wrote:Spider-Man would've been less of a risk if they just skipped the origin story and just made like this was just another entry in the series. Yes, it's a reboot, but any time a new director takes over an existing series, that can be considered just as much of a reboot as any. Just make a new story and have Spidey fight a new villain.

Yeah. That approach I don't mind so much.

"Aliens conquering Earth would be fine with me, as long as they make me their queen."- Gillian Anderson

I guess as the first real trailer it's kind of okay. Clearly Joss Whedon has found his perfect actor with Robert Downey Jr. And I am kind of encouraged by the first look of this Hulk. Otherwise the thing just feels rushed.

"The most dementing of all modern sins: the inability to distinquish excellence from success."-David Hare

It doesn't feel rushed to me. The way the trailer is cut suggests ILM was pressed to deliver quick finished shots of RDJ in the suit, but other than that, it looks like BIG ASS FUN. The fact Whedon also wrote and directed some of the best television episodes ever shows that he knows what's he doing, plot-wise.

"Aliens conquering Earth would be fine with me, as long as they make me their queen."- Gillian Anderson

I hate all these sexist comments pouring in about Jenkins and how Thor "doesn't need to have a woman's touch" or "turn it into a Lifetime version of a comic-book movie". I hope she proves these naysayers wrong. She's not Catherine Hardwicke or Lexi Alexander, people.

"Aliens conquering Earth would be fine with me, as long as they make me their queen."- Gillian Anderson

The Punisher is described as an hour-long procedural with a Marvel signature and a new take on one of comic book giant’s iconic characters, Frank Castle, a rising star detective with the NYC Police Department who moonlights as the vigilante Punisher seeking justice for those the system has failed.

The Punisher is described as an hour-long procedural with a Marvel signature and a new take on one of comic book giant’s iconic characters, Frank Castle, a rising star detective with the NYC Police Department who moonlights as the vigilante Punisher seeking justice for those the system has failed.

See, I've always felt that Frank would work best as a gritty TV series, but this "NYPD cop thing?" NO! Just NO! Why the hell do you need to change the origin? What possible freaking difference would it make?!?

Frank was a war vet and strong Christian who's family was wiped out by random violence. He's forced to turn to drastic measures when the system fails him. It's a conflicted decision, one at odds with a man who had been on the verge of being ordained as a priest until he randomly met the love of his life and decided on a family instead. That's dramatic gold right there.

It's incredibly frustrating, as a huge fan of the character, to see three disparate attempts that get certain aspects so right:

- The Dolph version nailed the "faith" aspect, and not much else.- The Jane version came closest, lifting some stuff verbatim from "Punisher: Year One" and ruining it with all the Garth Ennis "Welcome Back Frank" BS, and the butchering of the origin.- The Stevenson version NAILS the character, and the "pursuing detectives" subplot, but flushes everything else with it's focus on comic-book visuals, cartoonish villains, and an over-reliance on gore factor.

Ideally we'd get Ray Stevenson in a gritty and realistic portrayal of a man driven to drastic means through random happenstance, who struggles with his own inner demons (PTSD and his crumbling faith) and a dedicated Police officer driven to take him down, but in constant conflict with his/her own ideals of whether or not what Frank is doing is right or wrong.

In a perfect world The Punisher would be set in 1970s NYC. It could incorporate Frank's Vietnam experiences with a New York that was, at the time, a city being consumed from the inside by crime & filth while also allowing Frank to operate in a world where he could realistically get away with the stuff he was doing.

"The most dementing of all modern sins: the inability to distinquish excellence from success."-David Hare

HGervais wrote:In a perfect world The Punisher would be set in 1970s NYC. It could incorporate Frank's Vietnam experiences with a New York that was, at the time, a city being consumed from the inside by crime & filth while also allowing Frank to operate in a world where he could realistically get away with the stuff he was doing.